Who won the debate?
I gotta be honest, we're only an hour in and I'm already bored.
And I'm a wonk. I can't imagine what this is like for the "average" viewer.
I may change my mind later, but to me, thus far, I don't think this changes anybody's mind or vote, and frankly, trailing in the polls, that's what McCain needs.
I'll be curious to see the viewership hour by hour.
(On the other hand, this does take the topic off McCain torpedoing the entire economy.)
Later. It got better for those who stayed tuned in.
CNN had a live focus group feedback running along the bottom. McCain's lowest point was when he directly said he thought Obama wasn't qualified. Obama's best moment was in his last statement when he said his goal was to restore America's role of prestige in the world.
And McCain got in POW in the very last answer.
And I'm a wonk. I can't imagine what this is like for the "average" viewer.
I may change my mind later, but to me, thus far, I don't think this changes anybody's mind or vote, and frankly, trailing in the polls, that's what McCain needs.
I'll be curious to see the viewership hour by hour.
(On the other hand, this does take the topic off McCain torpedoing the entire economy.)
Later. It got better for those who stayed tuned in.
CNN had a live focus group feedback running along the bottom. McCain's lowest point was when he directly said he thought Obama wasn't qualified. Obama's best moment was in his last statement when he said his goal was to restore America's role of prestige in the world.
And McCain got in POW in the very last answer.
posted by mikevotes at
9:05 PM
10 Comments:
I thought (think) McCain is snarky and condescending. His base probably loves it.
I thought (think) Obama lacks a certain passion -- a righteous indignation -- with McCain continually saying "Barack just doesn't understand...". I think Obama needs to call out this sort of elitist superiority and dismissiveness of others. I think it's a flaw in leadership and Obama needs to point it out.
By
-epm, at 9:30 PM
I don't know. I come in loaded with so much baggage, I can't judge them objectively.
By
mikevotes, at 9:41 PM
Oh, I've got baggage, baby! (as if you didn't know).
I think McCain was composed and focused. I don't think the his stunts of the past couple of days affected his performance in any way. This is either a sign of how capable he is of multitasking and focus, or it's a sign that he spends no time reflecting on his actions; can blow up the workings of a nation and move on unfazed and unconcerned. Of course, I think it's the latter, but if you were just watching the debate in isolation you'd have no idea the dramatics and reactionary ricochets he'd just put the country -- or at least Congress -- through.
McCain was making a pitch to the independents. He mentioned more than once his opposition/independence to Bush and he talked about immigration reform. However, he was also beating a single note when it comes to foreign policy: all hard ass aggression, no diplomacy. I don't think he won any converts (his condescension was off putting to a real independent) and he may possibly have given some in his base pause for concern... assuming the base actually likes Bush and hates bipartisanship and immigration reform.
Obama is intelligent, composed, nearly unflappable. I wish he'd flap a little. But then again he is where he is today probably because he knows what he's doing. He saves the righteous indignation for rallies and keeps the debates largely on issues, facts and substance.
I don't think Obama won any converts either. Unless the independents are both uncomfortable with McCain's obvious contempt for Obama AND impressed with Obama's more wonkish, thoughtful approach to things, I don't think any one moved.
If you're undecided at this point, you obviously aren't interested in issues. You're probably looking for someone who will just make you feel secure that they know what they're doing and won't screw things up more than they are now. So Davis is right: it's about personality, not the issues. At least when it comes to the "undecideds."
As a partisan, I'm hoping Obama is pacing himself to the calendar. Waiting for the final push at and after the final debate. People will need fresh motivation when they go into the booth on 4 Nov, and a debate "victory" now is less important than a debate gaffe.
I still want to see McCain go all Nathan Jessep on live TV and have to be escorted off the stage. Probably won't happen, but one can hope.
Just some late night thoughts...
By
-epm, at 10:40 PM
Valuable resource of debate news summaries: http://www.ng2000.com/fw.php?tp=debate
By
ng2000, at 12:52 AM
epm wrote:
If you're undecided at this point, you obviously aren't interested in issues.
Good point, and something that's been ignored by many I've heard discussing the debate elsewhere.
By chance, I watched several minutes with the sound off, which is an interesting take. I noticed McCain's patronising grin that bordered on exasperation much more clearly. He seemed almost offended that he was expected to take Obama seriously. That kind of attitude may play well with the base, but not with independents and undecideds.
Obama seemed calm, focused, but serious. He looked at McCain, but McCain never looked at Obama. The only times he became perturbed were when there wasn't any more time to continue the discussion.
McCain obviously wanted to portray Obama as a "lightweight", but instead he only managed to make himself look like an arrogant old man put upon by a "young whipper-snapper". The "whipper-snapper" holding a lead in the polls doesn't really support that demeanour.
A lot of people say that Obama should have been more indignant at critical moments, but I think that would have worked against him.
His thrust has always been that he respects McCain, but McCain is wrong on the issues and facts.
By
Todd Dugdale , at 1:06 AM
WPM, I think it's a sign that he's so comfortable in the format.
And just as a general response, understand that Obama's public cool is a choice, a choice he made long ago, probably in college.
Black men have an added burden in that they have to be worried about being the "angry black man." Imagine him at Harvard Law. Would he have been head of the law review if he hadn't take the "cool" personality choice?
....
Todd, Many of the commentators spoke of McCain's angry, downlooking body language towards Obama.
There's something about Obama that really frustrates his opponents. Maybe it's the cool. Maybe it's that they don't think he's bled enough to be against them. Maybe it's that they can't believe they're losing to a relative new guy. Maybe his campaign is sharp elbows behind the curtain....
And, the only place I wish Obama'd been sharper was "Lesson learned from Iraq."
The short version answer is (I think) "What I learned is that when you're attacked by Al Qaeda, you focus all your response on beating Al Qaeda, not invading a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 and no Al Qaeda before we invaded."
By
mikevotes, at 6:21 AM
mike wrote:
"What I learned is that when you're attacked by Al Qaeda, you focus all your response on beating Al Qaeda, not invading a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 and no Al Qaeda before we invaded."
I agree with you on that, and that kind of phrasing is not "indignant", either.
I wish he would have countered the worn assertion that Al-Qaeda would take over Iraq if we left. It just isn't plausible. But he did make it clear that the Iraqi occupation has removed Iran's biggest foe, which is great.
Todd, Many of the commentators spoke of McCain's angry, downlooking body language towards Obama.
Yes, I've seen that and it's very pronounced. And, as epm posited, this is the kind of thing that would resonate with undecided voters because the issues must not matter much to anyone who is undecided at this point.
By
Todd Dugdale , at 12:10 PM
Todd, the problem with the Al Qaeda/Iraq thing that is it probably requires some education in the answer, and after all the knocks on Obama for "talking down" to people (accurate or not) he really has to be careful about venturing into that stuff, especially in a debate format.
By
mikevotes, at 1:37 PM
mike wrote:
the problem with the Al Qaeda/Iraq thing that is it probably requires some education in the answer
Yes, and it would have taken time from making other points as well.
Still it is the absolute core Republican argument against withdrawal, so slapping it down at some point will be necessary.
Al-Qaeda is clearly not a military organisation, nor have they shown any interest in "holding territory" as in a conventional conflict. As you have probably guessed by now, the continuing effort by the Republicans to blur the distinction between counter-insurgency and conventional war really rankles me.
The Taliban are the ones interested in controlling territory, not AQ.
By
Todd Dugdale , at 2:41 PM
Agreed. I think if you want to take that up, you probably do it through surrogates, at least for the education period.
Frankly, I don't think with a month left they'll really go after that because the development time is a little long, and they're winning with what they're selling right now.
By
mikevotes, at 4:47 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home